[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] replace functions which are only
From: |
Paolo Bonzini |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] replace functions which are only available in glib-2.24 |
Date: |
Tue, 15 May 2018 10:41:16 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 |
On 15/05/2018 09:42, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Olaf Hering <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Currently the minimal supported version of glib is 2.22.
>> Since testing is done with a glib that claims to be 2.22, but in fact
>> has APIs from newer version of glib, this bug was not caught during
>> submit of the patch referenced below.
>>
>> Replace g_realloc_n, which is available only since 2.24, with g_renew.
>
> We're about to bump our required GLib version to 2.34. See
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-05/msg02562.html
> Message-ID: <address@hidden>
>
> However, the patch may make sense for stable anyway.
It's a good idea even for non-stable. In the end, g_*alloc*_n are
rarely needed, and almost always g_*new* is better as it provides better
type safety. I'm queuing the patch, and we should consider adding a
checkpatch rule to suggest not using these functions.
Paolo
>> Fixes commit 418026ca43 ("util: Introduce vfio helpers")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Olaf Hering <address@hidden>
>> ---
>>
>> This must go into stable-2.12.
>
> Please see docs/devel/stable-process.rst for how to get a patch into a
> stable release.
>
>> util/vfio-helpers.c | 6 ++----
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/util/vfio-helpers.c b/util/vfio-helpers.c
>> index 006674c916..5fd4f5f212 100644
>> --- a/util/vfio-helpers.c
>> +++ b/util/vfio-helpers.c
>> @@ -522,8 +522,7 @@ static IOVAMapping *qemu_vfio_add_mapping(QEMUVFIOState
>> *s,
>>
>> assert(index >= 0);
>> s->nr_mappings++;
>> - s->mappings = g_realloc_n(s->mappings, sizeof(s->mappings[0]),
>> - s->nr_mappings);
>> + s->mappings = g_renew(IOVAMapping *, s->mappings, s->nr_mappings);
>
> I'm afraid this switches from allocating a bunch of IOVAMapping to a
> bunch of IOVAMapping *. My gcc duly warns.
>
>> insert = &s->mappings[index];
>> shift = s->nr_mappings - index - 1;
>> if (shift) {
>> @@ -577,8 +576,7 @@ static void qemu_vfio_undo_mapping(QEMUVFIOState *s,
>> IOVAMapping *mapping,
>> memmove(mapping, &s->mappings[index + 1],
>> sizeof(s->mappings[0]) * (s->nr_mappings - index - 1));
>> s->nr_mappings--;
>> - s->mappings = g_realloc_n(s->mappings, sizeof(s->mappings[0]),
>> - s->nr_mappings);
>> + s->mappings = g_renew(IOVAMapping *, s->mappings, s->nr_mappings);
>
> Likewise.
>
>> }
>>
>> /* Check if the mapping list is (ascending) ordered. */